What a tangled web this all becomes! We started with tobacco and alcohol, now the next step.
Let's tax soda because it's an influential cause of obesity, due to the sugar content. This would include the iced teas, etc. But the "diet" versions would be exempt.
Well, gee, why not also tax everything else that has sugar above "X"%? How about sugar itself?
Then we take that money & use it to pay part of the bill for expanding health care coverage.
While we're at it why not take a closer look at bacon, scrapple, high-fat beef cuts? Anybody interested in buying chicken futures?
The article would have us believe that the cigarette taxes are because our government cares about our health. I'd reserve judgment on that until I get an accounting of how our states spent those big bucks from the tobacco settlement cases. How much of the $ went into implementing stop smoking measures? Caring for those already diseased?
The extrapolations of this become very intriguing. That health care stuff ... if you're too overweight, smoke, or do other unhealthy things (let's not forget unprotected sex or sharing needles for illicit drugs) ... do you automatically get "taxed" in some way, like having some limitations put on the health care treatments? Extra income tax if you are overweight? (Japan fines people for waistline size!)
If they want to tax groceries, just do it awready, but don't try to tell me it's because they "care" about the constituencies. There is too much evidence that they really don't give a d%#$ about what their constiuencies think except when it comes to campaign sweet-talk.